IN Bar Multistate Bar 3 — Questions and Answers
Question 1: Congress passes a law banning firearms within 1,000 feet of any school, citing no connection to commerce. Based on United States v. Lopez, the law is most likely:
- Unconstitutional because it exceeds the Commerce Clause power (Correct answer)
- Constitutional under the Necessary and Proper Clause
- Constitutional as regulation of interstate commerce channels
- Unconstitutional because it violates the Second Amendment only
Correct answer: Unconstitutional because it exceeds the Commerce Clause power
Lopez held that possessing a gun near a school is not economic activity substantially affecting interstate commerce, so such a law exceeds the commerce power.
Question 2: A testator's will leaves "my car" to his nephew. At death, the testator no longer owned a car because it was destroyed and never replaced. What does the nephew take under the doctrine of ademption?
- Nothing, because the specific gift adeemed by extinction (Correct answer)
- The cash value of the car
- A replacement car purchased by the estate
- A share of the residuary estate equal to the car's value
Correct answer: Nothing, because the specific gift adeemed by extinction
Under ademption by extinction, a specific bequest fails entirely if the property is not in the estate at death.
Question 3: During a bar fight, a defendant swung a bottle at one person but missed and struck a bystander. Regarding the bystander, the defendant is liable for battery under which doctrine?
- Transferred intent (Correct answer)
- Respondeat superior
- Assumption of risk
- Comparative fault
Correct answer: Transferred intent
Transferred intent applies when a defendant intends a tort against one person but commits it against another.
Question 4: A defendant confessed after police continued questioning him despite his clear statement, "I want a lawyer." The confession is:
- Inadmissible because questioning must cease after an unambiguous request for counsel (Correct answer)
- Admissible if the confession was voluntary
- Admissible because Miranda warnings were given initially
- Inadmissible only if the defendant was under arrest for a felony
Correct answer: Inadmissible because questioning must cease after an unambiguous request for counsel
Under Edwards v. Arizona, once a suspect unambiguously invokes the right to counsel, all interrogation must stop until counsel is present or the suspect reinitiates.
Question 5: A merchant seller shipped nonconforming goods to a buyer with a note offering them as an accommodation. Under UCC Article 2, this shipment constitutes:
- A counteroffer, not an acceptance or breach (Correct answer)
- An acceptance and simultaneous breach
- A rejection of the offer
- An enforceable acceptance of the original terms
Correct answer: A counteroffer, not an acceptance or breach
Shipping nonconforming goods with a seasonable accommodation notice is a counteroffer, not an acceptance and breach.
Question 6: A federal diversity case is filed in Indiana. Which law governs the substantive issues and which governs procedure?
- Indiana substantive law and federal procedural law (Correct answer)
- Federal substantive law and Indiana procedural law
- Indiana law for both
- Federal law for both
Correct answer: Indiana substantive law and federal procedural law
Under Erie, a federal court sitting in diversity applies state substantive law and federal procedural law.
Question 7: An easement holder stopped using an easement for 15 years but took no other action. Has the easement been terminated by abandonment?
- No, because mere nonuse does not constitute abandonment without an act showing intent to abandon (Correct answer)
- Yes, because 15 years exceeds the statutory period
- Yes, because nonuse alone terminates easements
- No, because easements can never be abandoned
Correct answer: No, because mere nonuse does not constitute abandonment without an act showing intent to abandon
Abandonment requires nonuse plus a physical act demonstrating intent to permanently abandon; nonuse alone is insufficient.
IN Bar Multistate Bar 3
Congress passes a law banning firearms within 1,000 feet of any school, citing no connection to commerce.
Based on United States v.
Lopez, the law is most likely: